Movies are awesome

A general discussion forum, plus hauls and silly games.
User avatar
Gustavo
Minibot
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2012 9:47 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Movies are awesome

Post by Gustavo »

Chopping as I quote...
Onslaught Six wrote:I posted this on Tumblr, and figured--what the heck, why not here?

ONSLAUGHT SIX'S TOP 6(ISH) MOVIES OF 2012 IN NO ORDER

1. Looper
2. Prometheus
3. The Dark Knight Rises
4. The Avengers
5. Chronicle
6. The Amazing Spiderman
Prometheus was a disappointment. It was a perfectly adequate movie other than some plot-mandated stupidity from various characters, but it really disappointed me as an Aliens movie. It didn't have the same horror and suspense, mostly because every single character deserved to die for their stupidity. Ahem.
Shut the fuck up, I loved this. A lot of people were pissed off that we didn’t see a real Xenomorph, or a Facehugger, and to them I say: Did you watch the fucking thing? Yes, some of the characters were either profoundly stupid or insanely smart and managed to make jumps in logic that seemed to rely on information they didn’t really have—and those were all pretty much reliant on scenes that were shot and later deleted. I don’t know who to blame on that one.
There might be a great movie there -- or at least a better one -- that will appear as a special director's cut of 3 hours or so. I was unimpressed by the theatrical release, and haven't looked at the DVDs.

As for the rest, I either haven't seen them (Chronicle, Amazing Spider-Man), or mostly agree that they were perfectly fine movies. Looper was a better movie than it should have been, but I really cannot fathom why they would set up the whole looper thing with the guy killing himself, etc. Just dump the guy you want to kill back in the age of the dinosaurs and be done with it... But, surprisingly not bad to watch.

My list:

1. Django Unchained -- flat out the best movie I have seen all year, and the most honest depiction of race relations in the US in a Hollywood movie in the last 20 years (actually, it's not an honest depiction of race relations at all...). Similar to Inglorious Basterds, but better realized. And very, very funny.

2. Cabin In The Woods -- the banality of evil depicted here was beautiful.

3. Avengers -- I do like my Joss Whedon.

4. John Carter -- here was a fun, enjoyable, smart movie done in by the most boring advertising campaign possible. Let's just start with the title, which was shortened from John Carter: Warlord Of Mars. Really? That's the part you're cutting out, the whole warlord of mars bit? Idiots. Fun movie, great cgi monsters (green martians that looked plausible!). I really wish this had done well enough to get sequels.

5. Skyfall -- a thoroughly enjoyable Bond flick, unlike the previous Daniel Craig movies. I would love a spin-off of the Q and Moneypenny adventures, as they really made the movie work at points where it was dragging. Lots of plot holes, but they set the stage for the right level of suspension of disbelief earlier in the movie, and weren't trying to be "gritty" and "realistic". Better than Quantum of Solace with the Hotel Hindenburg.

6. I don't know... that Batman movie maybe? The comics it was based on were better. Never got around to seeing Lincoln, either Vampire Slayer or not.

It was an odd year for movies. No really compelling dramas. I usually go to see movies with a friend of mine who always disagrees with me about whether it was a good movie or not (we like different movies, but the sets of movies we think we might like has massive overlap), but this year, we actually liked 5(!) of the same movies. Last movie we both liked before this year... Notes On A Scandal, 2006.
I'm not wearing any pants.
User avatar
Onslaught Six
Supreme-Class
Posts: 7023
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:49 am
Location: In front of my computer.
Contact:

Re: Movies are awesome

Post by Onslaught Six »

but I really cannot fathom why they would set up the whole looper thing with the guy killing himself, etc. Just dump the guy you want to kill back in the age of the dinosaurs and be done with it...
This got cut from the film (unfortunately) but was explained in a deleted scene by Bruce Willis's character--the time machines aren't variable length. They send the person back exactly 30 years to the exact spot where the time machine was back then. It can't change the destination time or the location. (This is why Bruce doesn't just use the time machine to go back six hours and kill the guys who killed his wife, or something.)

Also, this DIDN'T really get explained, but upon thinking about it it's relatively obvious--the Rainmaker is sending the Loopers back to be killed by themselves so that they can't stop the Rainmaker, in the present or in the past. Bruce Willis gets contacted by a guy who has information on the Rainmaker's birth place, so obviously the ex-Loopers are working to try and get rid of him.
4. John Carter -- here was a fun, enjoyable, smart movie done in by the most boring advertising campaign possible. Let's just start with the title, which was shortened from John Carter: Warlord Of Mars. Really? That's the part you're cutting out, the whole warlord of mars bit? Idiots. Fun movie, great cgi monsters (green martians that looked plausible!). I really wish this had done well enough to get sequels.
I was completely unaware of this movie until after it failed miserably, and still haven't seen it.
BWprowl wrote:The internet having this many different words to describe nerdy folks is akin to the whole eskimos/ice situation, I would presume.
People spend so much time worrying about whether a figure is "mint" or not that they never stop to consider other flavours.
Image
User avatar
Gustavo
Minibot
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2012 9:47 am
Location: Seattle

Re: Movies are awesome

Post by Gustavo »

Onslaught Six wrote:This got cut from the film (unfortunately) but was explained in a deleted scene by Bruce Willis's character
The process by which a movie becomes shitty -- through cutting key scenes or never bothering to do them in the first place -- is kind of irrelevant. Author's intent doesn't matter.
--the time machines aren't variable length. They send the person back exactly 30 years to the exact spot where the time machine was back then. It can't change the destination time or the location. (This is why Bruce doesn't just use the time machine to go back six hours and kill the guys who killed his wife, or something.)
It looked more like he had no idea how to reprogram the thing, so if he wanted to go back, this was the only option.
Also, this DIDN'T really get explained, but upon thinking about it it's relatively obvious--the Rainmaker is sending the Loopers back to be killed by themselves so that they can't stop the Rainmaker, in the present or in the past. Bruce Willis gets contacted by a guy who has information on the Rainmaker's birth place, so obviously the ex-Loopers are working to try and get rid of him.
Why create the massive conflict of interest? Why not have another assassin kill the old assassin? Why must the Rainmaker be such a f.cking drama queen about it? Is there a deleted scene where an adult Rainmaker explains that the only thrill in his life any more is to take the stupidest possible risks?
I'm not wearing any pants.
User avatar
Onslaught Six
Supreme-Class
Posts: 7023
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:49 am
Location: In front of my computer.
Contact:

Re: Movies are awesome

Post by Onslaught Six »

Why create the massive conflict of interest? Why not have another assassin kill the old assassin?
There were some theories going around for a while that this is actually what happens for a majority of the Loopers. They have no way of actually knowing if the loop they closed is their own future self--they just see the gold and assume.

Interesting point: The silver (and gold) that they turn into the mob guys after they do a hit is put into a vault so it can later be used to strap to the targets so that the Loopers can be paid.
BWprowl wrote:The internet having this many different words to describe nerdy folks is akin to the whole eskimos/ice situation, I would presume.
People spend so much time worrying about whether a figure is "mint" or not that they never stop to consider other flavours.
Image
User avatar
Shockwave
Supreme-Class
Posts: 6205
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:10 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Movies are awesome

Post by Shockwave »

I'm not even sure I saw ten movies this year but screw it, I'm in. And this is in no particular order either.

1. Cabin in the Woods. Joss Whedon hardly ever fails me and this is no exception. He manages to do a modern horror movie that has done absolutely everything that has been done before while at the same time doing something that's never been done before while both commenting on and somewhat lampooning the genre in general. And it all works great. I liked it so much I got it for Christmas.

2. Marvel's Avengers. I put "Marvel's" there because apparently if you try to find this movie that's how retail/rental places distinguish this movie as the superhero one, not the crappy snoozeworthy british spy suckfest of the same name. I've been watching Marvel's movies for several years now knowing that it was all leading up to this and the pay off is definitely well worth it. My only complain is the recasting of Banner. there really should have been some sort of contract in the Hulk movie that whoever played him there would have to do so in the Avengers. But, the new guy worked out just fine.

3. Chronicle. I agree with pretty much everyting O6 said except for the Akira comparisson and that's only because I haven't seen Akira so I'll have to take his word for it. But yeah, if you haven't seen this, do so, it's awesome.

4. Resident Evil... Whatever. I forget which one their on. Don't get me wrong, it's a good movie but they lose me with the scale of what's happening. Like having a replica of several large cities in one facility just seems impossible to me. Or like in one of the previous movies where Umbrella had a city the size of Tokyo secretly hidden right underneat actual Tokyo. Sorry, not buyin it. This is probably because I watch too much "Modern Marvels" on the History Channel and as such, I know how huge of an engineering feat it would be for such facilities to exist, which really really winds up overshaddowing whatever might actually be going on in said facilities. And this is why I really wish the movies had followed the games a lot more closely. It would have been more believeable. But, it's still a good zombie/monster slashfest, still a fun movie.

5. Finding Nemo 3D. I already absolutely LOVE this movie and seeing it 3D was even more spectacular. You really get a better sense of the spacial relationships in 3D and in a movie that takes place almost entirely underwater, it really does make a difference.

6. Amazing Spider-Man. I did like this movie, but I like Raimi's versions better. I'd like this one better if they had better casting for Spidey/Parker. The guy's just not geeky enough, as O6 said. The Spidey part was fine and I agree with O6 about the wisecracks, but the Parker performance just wasn't convincing. He's too beatnick. I also didn't care for the fact that the web shooting wasn't part of his mutation, but was accomplished technologically. I get why they did it, and there is plenty of precedent for it from the comics, I just prefer it the other way. Also, I actually thought Martin Sheen and Sally Field did just fine as Ben and May. And Denis Leary was a nice bonus. Since I haven't seen MIB 3, I'm going to have to give the "WTF is this guy doing in this movie" award to Leary. As soon as I saw him on screen I was like "Holy Crap!" and suddenly the movie was instantly ten times cooler for it.

7. The Odd Life of Timothy Green. It was a decent movie but it's enormously predictable and the typical Disney formula. But it does have a nice message of seeing all the wonderful things the world has to offer.

And that's all I got. At least that I can remember.
User avatar
Onslaught Six
Supreme-Class
Posts: 7023
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:49 am
Location: In front of my computer.
Contact:

Re: Movies are awesome

Post by Onslaught Six »

My only complain is the recasting of Banner. there really should have been some sort of contract in the Hulk movie that whoever played him there would have to do so in the Avengers. But, the new guy worked out just fine.
While I was initially worried about this, too, Mark Ruffalo's Banner is so much...'better' than Ed Norton's. Maybe it was just the writing, but Norton's just takes everything so seriously, and his primary concern seems to be eliminating the Hulk from himself. Ruffalo portrays a much more mature Banner who defuses situations with sarcasm and jokes (because everyone in Avengers does) and also is almost completely in control of the Hulk, which is awesome to see.
except for the Akira comparisson and that's only because I haven't seen Akira so I'll have to take his word for it. But yeah, if you haven't seen this, do so, it's awesome.
Akira is worth seeing just for its cool animation and all, but the plot--at least of the movie--is a fucking mess. But it looks cool!
Since I haven't seen MIB 3, I'm going to have to give the "WTF is this guy doing in this movie" award to Leary. As soon as I saw him on screen I was like "Holy Crap!" and suddenly the movie was instantly ten times cooler for it.
Leary is actually my runner-up for that award his year. (In fact, it's very rare that Denis Leary shows up in a movie and I don't wonder why the hell he's here.)


On an unrelated note, I saw another timetravel movie that they mentioned in the commentary track for Looper, Primer. And by God is that a screwy mindfuck of a movie. Go check that out if you want your brain to hurt for a while.
BWprowl wrote:The internet having this many different words to describe nerdy folks is akin to the whole eskimos/ice situation, I would presume.
People spend so much time worrying about whether a figure is "mint" or not that they never stop to consider other flavours.
Image
User avatar
Onslaught Six
Supreme-Class
Posts: 7023
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:49 am
Location: In front of my computer.
Contact:

Re: Movies are awesome

Post by Onslaught Six »

NECROTHREAD.

I saw AmSpidey 2 and Robocop 2014 last night. I wrote my thoughts up on Tumblor but I figure the discussion would be good here too.
http://onslaughtsix.tumblr.com/post/848 ... 4-spoilers
BWprowl wrote:The internet having this many different words to describe nerdy folks is akin to the whole eskimos/ice situation, I would presume.
People spend so much time worrying about whether a figure is "mint" or not that they never stop to consider other flavours.
Image
User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
Posts: 5225
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: Movies are awesome

Post by Sparky Prime »

I saw The Amazing Spider-Man 2 on Friday...
Spoiler
Like O6, I really didn't see much point in showing Peter's parents fighting with the assassin on the plane at the start of the film. It's a long action sequence that really doesn't add anything to the plot, aside from Richard Parker uploading something from his laptop.

Anyway, jump to modern day with Spidey doing his super hero thing while he's supposed to be at his high school graduation. Spidey has fun with crime fighting, which was an element that I felt was sorely lacking in the Raimi films. And he's just like classic Peter Parker with his super hero activities getting in the way of his normal life. Also good to see they didn't just completely ignore Captain Stacy making him promise to stay away from Gwen. Peter has a hard time dealing with the guilt so instead they give them an on again/off again relationship, which is only further complicated when Gwen finds out she might be going to London for college.

Villains! Can't say I really cared for how they portrayed Max Dillon. He reminded me a lot of Jim Carry's Edward Nigma from "Batman Forever". Brilliant yet severely under-appreciated scientist type with an unhealthy obsession for the hero of the film (only in this case Spider-Man rather than his alter ego). I think he's better as Electro, but his reason for turning against Spidey felt weak. Harry Osborn was much more interesting villain. Apparently he and his father both have a genetic disease, which Norman failed to cure for himself but all the research his company has done might give Harry a chance. Only the board members want to kick Harry out as owner of the company so they can take over and run it as they want. Oh, and turns out Peter and Harry used to be close friends because Harry was there for him when his parents died. You know, when Peter was 5 years old. At any rate, with Norman's passing, Peter decides to be there to support Harry.

And this establishes somewhat of a theme for the film. Oscorp tries to bury anything that gets in their way. We find out the reason Richard and Mary Parker left so suddenly was because Richard found out his research was going to be used for chemical warfare and he wanted no part of it, so Oscorp framed him for trying to sell out. Not sure why they decided to leave Peter behind though. Peter finds this all out from a SECRET LAB Richard had hidden in an abandoned subway tunnel, which is where the laptop download from the start of the film factors in. Guess Aunt May was wrong about Richard being such a normal, down to Earth working man after all. How did he set all of that up? Anyway, Electro similarly had his power plant designs stolen by Oscorp and he was buried in the company as an unknown maintenance man, and is locked away in Ravencroft so the scientists can learn how he works. Oscorp also uses this to frame Harry to get him kicked out of his own company, and Harry feels his father buried him by shipping him to boarding school when he was 11.

So Harry breaks Electro out promising to give him his power plant if he helps him break into Oscorp. Turns out Oscorp has this secret section with all the gear to set up for the Insidious Six. The spider-venom seems to work but because it was apparently key'd to Richard Parker's DNA, it transforms Harry into the Green Goblin. Final showdown, Electro is overloaded and explodes thanks to Peter and Gwen working together, despite Peter telling her she shouldn't be there. I wouldn't say Electro is dead though. He shows the ability to reform his body during the film. Then Goblin shows up, realizes who Spidey is because Gwen is there and in the resulting fight Gwen is killed and Harry is knocked out and captured by authorities.

Peter understandably has a hard time dealing with Gwen's death. He stops being Spider-Man (or doing much of anything), but Aunt May says some things to help inspire him to pick up his life again. Harry, despite being in prison,has some plans for a small team and has a butler that apparently has access to Oscorp and gets the Rhino mech suit which is given to Aleksei Sytsevich, where the movie ends with Spidey returning to fight him.
So while the movie has some issues, I still really enjoyed it. Certainly doesn't deserve some of the flack I've been seeing some people giving it. And I would say the two Amazing films are better than the 3 Raimi films.

Edit: I also wanted to point out how the trailers had this whole scene with Harry telling Peter that Oscorp had him under surveillance. And there is a voice clip I believe with Harry asking what they should do about Peter with Norman saying not everyone has a happy ending. That's not in the film at all. Although they do have a scene in the film where Harry is being spied on while he's with Peter. Just makes me wonder how much they changed the story of the film during editing.
User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
Posts: 6323
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Movies are awesome

Post by andersonh1 »

Jurassic World

I went and saw this on Saturday and sprang for the 3D version. I think I stopped noticing it after awhile, so I don't know if I can recommend it. In any case, great movie, and probably the best sequel of the three (I actually liked JP3 better than the Lost World, but I'm probably one of the few). The trailers give away a lot of the good stuff, though not all, and it's fun to see how it all fits together. It's a good solid action movie with plenty of great visuals, and it's really good to see the dinosaur theme park up and running and what that might be like. I'm really glad they didn't go back to site B again with a small group trying to stay alive vs. wild dinosaurs. I think that plotline is pretty much exhausted.

Some thoughts, and I'll spoiler this section:
Spoiler
- trained Velociraptors: great idea, really well handled. It's made very clear that they're still wild animals and that they will turn on just about anyone, even Chris Pratt's character, Owen Grady, on one occasion (the scene where he rescues the guy who falls into the raptor cage). But he's spent months or years working with them and training them and acting as the "alpha" for the pack, and it only becomes a little hard to believe in at the end of the movie.
- The night hunt in the jungle with the raptors is as cool as it sounds. Very well done.
- Indominus Rex - created to a be an intelligent killing machine, and that's what he is. In addition, as Pratt's character points out, I Rex has been raised in isolation in a too-small for her size enclosure, and has no socialization at all. One it gets loose, it kills everything it comes across.
- The kids are fine. Not annoying at all. Well done.
- Of course, you know the annoying InGen military guy who wants to weaponize the raptors is going to get eaten. Yep, he does.
- On the other hand, Mr. Masrani the new head of the company who owns the park is a pretty likeable and sympathetic character who has done a decent job of learning from all of Hammond's mistakes. He's got a containment team for dinosaur escapes, he's hired experts (Owen, for one) to help wrangle the animals, and he's done other things to keep the park running and safe for about 10 years, according to the dialogue. So it's a shame when he's killed off 3/4 of the way through the movie.
- there are a lot more family-unfriendly deaths in this than any of the other JP movies, in my opinion. Probably because there are more people to be eaten since there are 20,000 people on the island. No, not many of them die, but the ones that do die in pretty gruesome ways. Not in full view of the camera, but you do see blood spattering and hear screams and bones crunching. The poor girl assigned to watch the kids is picked up by a Pteranodon, dropped in the Mososaur tank, picked up again screaming the whole time, and then both are eaten by the Mosasaur.
- The intelligence of the Raptors and Indominus Rex are a bit on the hard to believe side, particularly at the end of the movie. Still... it's not a deal breaker.
- The one returning cast member from a previous Jurassic Park movie is Dr. Wu, the geneticist from the first movie. He's got a slightly larger role this time around, and a lot of the blame for the disaster can be laid at his feet. Once again he lives through the movie, so he may be back. The character dies in the first book, having his intestines pulled out by a Velociraptor. But then, Ian Malcolm and Hammond die in the first book too, only for Malcolm to get retconned into surviving for the sequel.
- for the people griping about Bryce Howard's character: it's called a character arc. Please. Spare me your feminist screeds, Joss Whedon. She's a professional woman doing her job well, who hasn't taken spent the time with her nephews that she should have. There's no indication that she's unhappy with her life or her job. On the contrary, she seems to enjoy them. And when the running and screaming starts, she's right in there with Owen, saving lives and doing what she can. Great character, well acted.
- I thought the movie was well cast and apart from the villains (which you're not supposed to like), I didn't find any of the characters annoying.
Go see it. It's great. :mrgreen:
User avatar
Dominic
Supreme-Class
Posts: 9331
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: Movies are awesome

Post by Dominic »

I am just accepting that this year is not going to be as good a movie year as last year.

Last year, I had plenty to look forward to.

-Amazing Spider-Man 2: Admit it. We all wanted to see them off Gwen.

-Winter Soldier: I did not like it anywhere near as much as other people did. But, as a guy at the local comic shop put it, the movie played like a live action comic. So, points for style. (I also appreciate the narrative experiment of having the movie influence a related television show.)

-Age of Extinction: I did want to see it. And, it was the best TF movie over all.

-Dawn of the Planet of the Apes: Best movie ever. Adorable chimps. Smartly pitched high concept. Adorable bonobo. Good action sequences. Maurise the orangutan teaching adorable baby chimps adorable chimp lessons at baby chimp school. Logically sets up for a sequel that will make us uncomfortable about human nature. Gorillas. Good sountrack. And, chimps. Chimps everywhere. (Have I mentioned how much I want a pet chimp?)

-Lucy: Crushing disappointment. But, looking forward to it was something of a high. The "R" rating is just to make the movie seem more sophisticated than it was. (To be fair, Johansenn and Friedman did a good job. But, the movie was terrible. Avoid this mess.)


This year, this is nothing likely to disappoint me. But, there is not as much to look forward to.

-Age of Ultron: Sat through it twice, the second time as an outing with friends. Not bad. Not good. Kinda forgettable. There was potential for a better movie.

-Terminator Gensys: Going in to this one wth high hopes and low expectations.

-Jurassic World. I generaly disagree with Anderson. (I give it a C/D.) It has flashes of brilliance. But, it has too much action movie cliche.

The good:
Spoiler
The scene in the raptor pen that Anderson mentions is well handled. The raptors are clearly moving in for a kill, and the handler spots it. (Given later scenes, I think that the implication is that they were going for the guy who fell in, not the handler.)

The raptor's intelligence was not too out of bounds. "Jurassic" assumes that raptors are highly intelligent. There is explication about how none of the dinos are pure-strain. And, there are birds (mostly parrot and corvid variants) that can be trained and have a sense of loyalty. The raptors avoid threatening their person, even if they attack others.

Blue running off at the end also makes sense. (She likes her handler. But, he does not own her. Having her stay would have undermined a main theme of the movie.)

The mcguffisaurus rex is a hybrid. The reveal about the raptor genes (and some other plot points relating to it) was dumb. But, the design and movements of the dinosaur smootly included enough raptor elements for it to make visual sense.

Similarly, the indominus rex (the mcguffisaur) demonstrated traits of the other species. (Cuttle fish are smart, and prone to cannabalism . So, yeah, she would have been that terrible of a threat, which raises problematic questions.)

Unpredictable deaths. A few of the named characters who died, and the way they died, were unpredictable. (One is actually ruined by toy packaging.) However, I get the feeling that the woman killed by flying dinos was meant to be less sympathetic in early drafts.

There were flashes of a good movie. The organizational disfunction (evident in the conversation between Wu and Misrati about dinosaur design) was almost good. The motivation for the bad guy made sense in that I could see a real person using the same logic.

Good self-commentary on the franchise, and action movies in general, with the discussions about upping the wow factor.

The subtle call-backs to the original movie's locations were a nice touch.


The bad:
Spoiler
So much action/summer movie stupid.

-The park had been running smoothly for how many years and everybody gets stupid on the weekend that the kids show up? Really? The handlers cannot manage to cage a baby pig, and they are in charge of apex predators? The mcguffisaur's cage was that poorly designed, not even accounting for things the animal should have been predictably able to do?

-The kids were annoying. The kids in the first movie were there for the beta test of the park. The kids in the second movie just....show up the weekend that everything goes to hell. There are pointless, and even contrary details about the kids and their family. (The mother says that the older brother is cruel to the younger brother. But, there is no sign of this in the movie. In fact, the older brother comes across favourably in most scenes.) The movie spent too much time on unkillable characters.

-Why exactly is the mcguffisaur's composition so classified that the park cannot even tells its game warden (the guy training the raptors) what it is made out of? Who the hell thought it was a good idea to mix the specific species that they did? (Oh, that composition explains everything about the monstrous dino. But, why would anybody make one, even when trying to up the "wow" factor?)
- for the people griping about Bryce Howard's character: it's called a character arc. Please. Spare me your feminist screeds, Joss Whedon. She's a professional woman doing her job well, who hasn't taken spent the time with her nephews that she should have.
I disagree that she did her job well. But, I got a chuckle out of your phrasing (and agree with the larger point).

The character dies in the first book, having his intestines pulled out by a Velociraptor. But then, Ian Malcolm and Hammond die in the first book too, only for Malcolm to get retconned into surviving for the sequel.
Malcom magically surviving is one of the things that made me lose interest in the franchise as a kid. The comics were especially muddy in this regard, having characters who died in the book or movie showing up together.
Post Reply